About Me

In the name of Allah (God),
I have decided to dedicate sincere and honest endeavour in helping to establish the Truth by helping to defend the good name of the last Prophet (pbuh) of Allah as well as refuting many other lies and misconceptions that are being disseminated by the insincere, wicked, deceptive, intellectually and morally bankrupted individuals as well as the ignorant individuals who all share a faulty characteristic; a blatant disregard for the Truth.
I ask Allah to purify my intentions and save me from doing any good action for self-aggrandizement, as all actions are judged by intentions. May Allah Love me, and bless this work. My message to any non-Muslim reading this is thus:
Please give Islam a chance, research it for yourself and allow Muslims and Muslim sources to be your primary resources you refer to when studying Islam rather than basing your views on agenda-motivated Islamophobic sources.
O Allah, You are Al-Wadud (The Loving)...please O Allah love me and bless all those Muslims and non-Muslims who read this.
Ameen

Tuesday, 22 December 2015

The claims on the net about a member of the Kuwaiti royal family "Abdullah al-Sabah" converting to Christianity have no evidence to them at all.
It really seems like a hoax. Honest people should stop propagating this story

I could not find anything on the internet to even verify this 'person's existence never mind the purported conversion to Christianity.

There's nothing independent on the internet to prove his existence and
furthermore, there are quotes stating he does not even exist on the list
of Kuwaiti princes:
Some independent websites with Shiite leanings denied the reports and
quoted another Kuwaiti prince,Azbi al-Sabah, who said: “There’s no one
by that name in the Kuwaiti royal family.” In actual fact, the name
Abdullah does not appear on the list of the 15 members of the royal
family who rule this small, extremely wealthy country in different
capacities [news2onlinenigeria.com]

Thursday, 17 December 2015

This is something which seems to be pervasive in Christian apologetics. It's nothing to be proud of, it's a fallacious argument.

Argument: Muslims believe in a similar concept to the incarnation concerning the Quran - 'inlibration' (the eternal words of God having two natures, a created nature and an uncreated nature).

This is a foundation stone claim where the Christian debater uses this argument to build his/her overall argument which generally is used in responses to arguments against the notion of a 100% finite and 100% infinite being. So here the argument is an equivocation between the Quran and the Christian incarnation belief concerning Jesus.

This is replete with fallacies. The obvious one; it's a straw man argument. The argument actually misrepresents Muslim belief concerning the Quran due to their conflation between the Quran and the Mushaf. The two are not the same as we shall see later.

The incarnation is the belief God took on human flesh ( a human nature).The hypostatic union is a concept which expresses the belief he was fully God and fully human simultaneously (at the same time) and the two natures are inseparable.

We do not believe the act of scribing the Quran onto any object renders the said object as having two natures - regardless of whether the object is a book, stone or whatever else. The incarnation states a man (Jesus p) had two natures - a divine nature and a human nature (a created and uncreated nature).

The book (paper and ink) which the words of the Quran are scribed are called a Mushaf, it's not the Quran.

Louay Fatoohi explains the difference:

In other words, the term “Qur’an” refers to the specific “revelation that was read to Prophet Muhammad” whereas the term “mushaf” denotes the “written form” of that revelation.

For those who are struggling to follow, the book we read the Quran from in our mosques is a Mushaf. We have many of these in the mosque. Nobody in the mosque says the 'Qurans' are over there but rather they say (or should say) the Mushafs (or use the Arabic plural Masahif) are over there.

The two aren't the same - thus it's a fallacy to even try to draw a comparison between the scribing of the Quran and the Incarnation belief.

Use common sense - are they saying a hafiz is a like their concept of Jesus too?

Think about it logically, are they saying your iPhone has a 'phone nature' and a 'divine nature' because you have the words of the Quran saved on it (either audio or written). What about a CD, are they saying the CD now has two natures too? What about a Hafiz (somebody who has memorised the Quran), are they saying these humans have two natures akin to the way Christians view Jesus?!

The argument is inconsistent, what of the Bible?

What about the Bible? Christians can testify themselves to the fallacy of this argument as they don't view the Bible as having a dual nature nor do they view each book in the Bible in such a way. Christian theology teaches the words of God are eternal, I've not only heard this from a pastor but it's actually written in the Psalms:

Would they say a person who has memorised the Bible, or even parts of it, is akin to their belief in Jesus - ie he/she has an eternal and human nature? Or their phone/PC which has the Bible stored on it has a created and uncreated nature?

I doubt it. The reason why, it's a misrepresentation (a straw man) and the fallacy of false equivocation as the Christians recognise the book (paper and ink) is distinct from the words which they believe to be eternal.

Some interpret being humbled (wa hum saghirun) to mean that the treaty holders should render the indemnity in a state of humility, but some say that the very fact of paying the indemnity is tantamount to this "being humbled" or "being the minority party" (R). Though the practice of forcing the treaty holders to pay the indemnity in a humbled manner was not unknown in Islamic history, many jurists, such as al-Nawawi, pointed out that the Prophet and Caliphs never did so and said that the treaty people's indemnity should be received with gentleness, as one would receive payment of a debt. Umar ibn al-Khattab reportedly agreed to call the indemnity "charity" (sadaqah) when asked to change its name from jizyah. [Loc 24960, Kindle]

Thus we see Prophet Muhammad and the Caliphs never humiliated or hurt the payers of Jizya at the time of taking payment. In fact it should be taken with gentleness as per the opinion of many jurists.

Here's a quote you may see doing the rounds on Islamophobic websites in an attempt to misdirect you from the bigger picture:

As-Sawi noted that the payment of the jizya signified that the non-Muslims are “humble and obedient to the judgements of Islam.” It ensured the “willing submission” or “state of abasement” specified by this verse and spelled out by the Bedouin commander al-Mughira bin Sa”d when he met the Persian Rustam. Said al-Mughira: “I call you to Islam or else you must pay the jizya while you are in a state of abasement.”Rustam replied, “I know what jizya means, but what does “˜a state of abasement” mean?”Al-Mughira explained: “You pay it while you are standing and I am sitting and the whip hanging is over your head.”

Some further resources for those willing to learn about the Jizya and Dhimmis

James White is adamant he was misrepresented and has gone off on a tirade against me with his customary 'you Sir are a liar' reaction and his customary manner of belittlement (unfair again!). The irony here is James' friend Sam Shamoun agreed with the video and considered it to be a fair representation of White's comments. I wonder if he would call Sam Shamoun a liar now - after all he called my honesty in question for sincerely taking a particular interpretation of his comments..

Sam Shamoun defended MBC and I against accusations of having misrepresented James White. He did this more than once. I have the screen shots but at the time of writing I noticed MBC has made another video which quite conveniently includes one of Sam's comments confirming this, see timestamp 2.52.

So James would be better-off not to call into question people's honesty but rather look at what has been said and try to assess whether there's a genuine misunderstanding out of ambiguity. That's only fair, right? Yet, I'm infamous for being unfair and unthinking and slash-and-burn (whatever that Americansim means)?

Not only this, White attributes MBC's video concerning Nabeel Qureshi entitled James White exposes Nabeel Qureshi about lying about his former faith - Must Watch to me. MBC is FAIR, if he uses one of my videos he mentions it in the description - he's good like that. He's fair, like that. There's NO mention of me anywhere near that video and it's on MBC's channel - quite why James White attributed that video to me is baffling. It's unfair to criticise somebody for a video that he has no part in, right? Yet, I'm infamous for being unfair and unthinking and slash-and-burn (whatever that Americansim means)?

JamesWhite can have whatever opinion he wants of my videos and of MBC's videos for that matter but don't call somebody dishonest for no reason. And you know what, if you're going to smear somebody as 'unthinking' and lacking regard for honesty perhaps you'd like to show it. Don't say it, SHOW it. That's only fair right? I mean I can say somebody like Usama Dakdok is dishonest and I can SHOW it. Just look here.

I get the feeling James White was just letting off steam through UNFAIR insults and name-calling due to the backlash and criticism from CHRISTIANS concerning his comments on ISIS vis-a-vis Islam as well as my videos concerning James White in the past - perhaps these 3 themes which I fairly criticised him on were playing on his mind:

1. James White made misogynistic comments towards the appearance of some Mormon women. One of the reasons why I showcased this video was in part due to supporters of White, who often claim Islam is misogynistic, so they can see the double standard they operate - the very man they follow in apologetics was making misogynistic comments:

2. James White exaggerates what he knows (I assume out of pride). However. isn't exaggeration a form of dishonesty? Try the 'you Sir are a liar' act on yourself - you don't spare your fellow Christians from this act so try it on yourself, there's plenty of scope here.

3. James White claimed Allah repented yet he was corrected by myself and another YT user. ALL the translations of the Quran showed White was wrong on this. This was of particular interest as White brags about how he goes to Islam's best material to accurately represent Islam yet, in this instance, he overlooked the known translations in favour of a guy online called Sam Shamoun. White's pride did not allow him to even correct himself - he insisted he was right (out of pride?) and he unfairly denounced me as a dishonest man for simply sticking to all the experts:

Questioning somebody's honesty is one thing but demonstrating they are dishonest is another. In fact, to say somebody is dishonest in an attempt to smear them out of frustration is unbecoming. Sure James White was on the end of a lot of criticism due to his comments on ISIS-Islam from his own flock; the Christian fundamentalists (including Shamoun's followers) were up in arms prior to MBC and I posting our respective videos. There's no excuse to allow that frustration to lead James to speak unjustly towards MBC and I. It does not excuse him for his sensationalistic insults.

James White also claims I have misrepresented Shamoun on numerous occasions, when and where? Again, don't just say it, show it. In fact, Shamoun seemingly defended me personally in the comment section of his FB where a lady called Kelly attacked me and Shamoun (Sam can correct me if I'm wrong and I can edit this comment out) appeared to defend my integrity in posting clips on the whole.

All the clips that I post are always genuine - I'm not doing cassetteboy type of editing. So the question is, if I'm posting whole clips, how could I have misrepresented Shamoun? Nevermind on numerous occasions...

Moreover, Shamoun's regular responses to my videos comprise of insults and debate challenges which are unrelated to the content of the video. He does not sit there claiming I misrepresented him - he knows that one cannot make audio and video clips up.

In any case, the fair-minded person can check all my videos and decide for themselves - they can do the same for MBC (don't just blindly take White's frustration-influenced comments as the end of the matter). As of now, most of my videos are on this channel as my main popular channel was deleted a few months ago.

James owes somebody an apology. I don't expect it as pride is rampant in apologetics. However, I will certainly accept it graciously if it is forthcoming.NOTE: White attacked MBC too. They have a long history of interaction. From my view of MBC and through my interaction with him, he's a good person who does strive for honesty and has integrity. I have not seen anything to the contrary from him and I have followed him for a good number of years. Of course he can speak for himself - this blog was about myself.

The relevant excerpt of White's post:

Now, the video that Sam Shamoun posted and invited comment on specifically has the name of Yahya Snow on it. [Please note: I am writing this on an aircraft, and those of you who have used airborne wi-fi know you cannot stream video on it, so I cannot go back and quote time stamps, etc. I hope to play the video on the Dividing Line so I can address it more fully in that way]. Yahya Snow is infamous for being one of the unfair, unthinking, slash-and-burn style Muslims who think misrepresentation is the best form of dawa. I have rarely mentioned him for simply this reason. Like certain Roman Catholics, or KJV Onlyists, Snow has proven himself to hold a horribly deficient view of simple honesty and accuracy in his words and actions. To be honest, I have no idea why Sam Shamoun even posted his video, knowing full well how many times Snow has misrepresented him, and how he was, obviously, misrepresenting me as well. I am disappointed, to be honest. But that issue aside, the fact that so many jumped on the video *without checking its accuracy* is astoundingly disappointing—and telling, to be sure. I guess I should not expect those who refuse to do their homework about Muslims to do their homework about me, either!Now Snow was attempting to sow discord amongst those of us who minister to Muslims (and with a little help he succeeded!). I am thankful for what others do in reaching out to Muslims, even when I may disagree with them on their methodology or on specific points of argument. Snow attempted to make it look like I was saying David Wood was lying. Yet, an honest examination of what I said, and what David said, would disabuse the clear thinking person of such a notion. I was saying anyone who says ISIS *exhausts* the spectrum of Islam is lying, just as anyone who says ISIS is nowhere to be found in that same spectrum would be lying as well. David was saying ISIS is Islamic and that its foundations are found firmly rooted in the Islamic sources. Now, David may well think ISIS is the most consistent form of modern Islam, I don’t know. Maybe David thinks the Qur’an and Hadith are far, far more coherent and consistent than I do. I know David has often done videos demonstrating that there are texts in the Qur’an and Hadith that can be interpreted (and are interpreted by various militant groups) to command violence and the murder of the kafir. But I have a feeling David well knows that there are Muslims who contextualize those texts and argue that they cannot be applied in every situation today, and in fact, some believe they could not be applied outside of those historic situations. I have never heard him say “And every single Muslim on the planet believes this.” What I have heard him say is basically, “Way, way, way too many Muslims DO believe this,” and with that I would agree wholeheartedly. I do not know if David knows Muslims who risk themselves by standing against ISIS or not—I assume he does, so unless I hear him denying their existence, I will assume we are not in conflict on this point.Snow likewise attempted to take my comments about Nabeel’s video and use them as a weapon as well. I did express surprise at Nabeel’s words. I did so because I have come to have a good bit of respect for Ahmadiyya Muslims, and that was his background. Now, I know the Sunnis reject the Ahmadiyya. They are not Muslims from their perspective. OK. I will not quote Ahmadiyya sources as “Muslim” in a debate with a Sunni (despite the fact that my Sunni friends will NOT return the favor). And I get the argument: it is pretty hard to see how the Ahmadiyya can be truly Muslim when they reject one of the key, central tenets of historic Islam: the finality of the prophethood of Muhammad. I get it. But the fact is, the Ahmadiyya are peaceful people, often persecuted by the Sunni in foreign nations. You don’t have to worry about your Ahmadiyya neighbor tossing a pipe bomb at you as you pass by while walking your dog, to be sure. So I was, in fact, surprised at the video simply because I would expect at least a mention of the existence of non-militaristic Muslims in the discussion of Paris. I likewise found quite interesting the claim in a video I had not seen before that if Nabeel were still Muslim he would have to join ISIS in Syria. I am unaware of any Ahmadiyya in ISIS—in fact, doesn’t ISIS kill all Ahmadiyya in its lands as heretics? So is Nabeel saying he has seen the inconsistency of his own Islamic background and now believes that the *only* consistent interpretation of the materials leads to an ISIS like Islam? But wouldn’t this require him (and everyone else arguing that point) to be able to demonstrate a significantly greater level of consistency in those sources than our own apologetic arguments presuppose? Maybe Nabeel (or David) could find the time time join me on the DL to discuss just these things. That might be very useful.Here's my email through his website
Hi Dr White

It has been brought to my attention that a recent video of mine has misrepresented you. Firstly, it was never my intention to misrepresent you - this is no the purpose of my work online.
Just to show you how easy it is to come to my interpretation of your comments you can look at Sam Shamoun\'s FB where he repeatedly insists I have not misrepresented you. Thus he and I came to the same understanding of your comment - I suggest many others did too.

I would also like to add - the video on my channel makes it clear that those comments you made were not specifically about Dr Wood and Dr Nabeel. The video on MBC\'s channel is an edited version and it does not carry my video description which indicates the comments were not directly in response to the aforementioned.
Dr White, I will leave my original video up so you can view it along with the video description (all unedited) - I will then be more than happy to remove it as my intention is never to misrepresent anybody.

I would also strongly encourage you to view comments from others in the Christian community who had listened to your DL show in its entirety and viewed the video - there were many who believed you were accurately represented which indicates it's an honest misunderstanding.

Regards

Hi Dr White

Sorry, just an addendum, I re-read what you wrote and it seems as though you are under the impression the video concerning Nabeel on MBC\'s channel is also made by myself - it\'s not. I have no responsibility for that video or any content in that video.
Regards

Conclusion

We should all strive to understand each other. We should not label others unfairly. We should recognise when we point fingers there may be more pointing back at us. We should be fair and we should not be overly emotional to the point where emotions impede our ability to discern justly and to speak of others fairly.

Tuesday, 1 December 2015

Salutations of
Peace and Blessing forever be upon the Prophet Muhammad,upon Jesus, upon Moses, upon
Abraham, upon Noah and all of God’s Elect

WHAT IS THE
POSITION OF THE HOLY QUR’AN ON THE PREVIOUS SCRIPTURES AND THE PRESENT DAY
“BIBLE”?

Much talk
and confusion by many who are not fully aware of the Qur’an’s position as it
relates to the previous Scriptures is taking place. As a result, much conflict
is arising, since the true position of the Qur’an and Islam seems to be
misrepresented and distorted. The Holy Qur’an, which is believed in
wholeheartedly by the adherents of the Islamic faith, is considered to be the
undisputed final revelation of God Almighty, ALLAH that was revealed to the
seal of all Prophets and Messengers, Muhammad peace be upon him (S), from God Almighty.

The Prophet
Muhammad (S) was born in the late sixth century (570 CE) in the Arabian
Peninsula, in the city of Makkah.
After living a normal life amongst his
people, he was elected to prophet hood at the age of forty. At that time, he
began to receive the revelation of God Almighty, ALLAH, through the Angel
Jibril. The revelation of the Qur’an from ALLAH to Muhammad (S) would continue
over the next twenty-three years until its completion and then, the completion
of the life of the Prophet (S) himself in this world.

Throughoutthis time, Prophet Muhammad (S) would
encounter some serious challenges and opposition to his prophetic mission. It even occurred that the height and severity
of this opposition caused him to have to send many of his followers out of the
country to the Christian ruled land of
Abyssinia, and eventually, the
remaining had to migrate from their homeland of Mecca
to a welcoming asylum in the city of Madinah.

It was in
Madinah that the prophetic mission took on a new shape and emphasis, as the
Prophet (S) assumed a head of state status alongside the role of prophet hood.
This demanded that not only was the Prophet (S) responsible for the spiritual
and religious realities of those who accepted and followed his call, but now,
he was also to assume a legislative role and authority over his followers.
Given this nature, the state, along with defending its security and existence,
also met with expansion. In so doing, it
began to encounter a larger concentration of peoples, cultures and faiths. It was also here where the Prophet (S) first
encountered a Jewish community, who resided in the city. Given this back drop,
we witness an array of verses pertaining to people of previous Scriptures and
the role and belief of the Muslims towards them.

On the one
hand, there was, at times, an antagonistic Jewish community in Madinah, and
then a curious Christian community in Abyssinia
and other areas. The prophetic mission was already into its fourteenth year and
the word of Islam was becoming popular. Makkah
was already a very popular and central city, so the news of a new religion and
Scripture from God Almighty stirred up the religious curiosity of the people.

Given this
novel phenomenon, locals and foreign delegations began to arrive and question
the Prophet (S) about certain beliefs as it related to the Qur’an and its
positions on their respective faiths. The following is the explanation of
several verses of the Qur’an and their implications and positions referring to
the earlier communities as a whole, and those amongst the Prophet (S) as well. Let us hear what the Qur’an says and see what the
true position of the Qur’an is on the People of the Book (Jews & Christians)
as they are termed.

Also, we
would like to introduce here two points of interest that are grossly
misunderstood by Christians. Namely, the
Qur’an as it relates to Mary, the mother of Jesus and her title as, “The sister
of Aaron” and the other point of contention being, Mary mistakenly understood
to be part of the trinity. These two points will be dealt with in a separate
article, but they are similar in nature in that they are points that the
Christians, either ignorantly or arrogantly, prove themselves to be unfair and inconsistent
when it comes to looking at the Qur’an and its message.

Before we
actually cite the relevant verses, it needs to be understood that the Qur’an
has a threefold purpose in addressing the People of the Book.Firstly, it is to acknowledge and inform
those who were unaware of the previous Scriptures of what ALLAH has revealed. Secondly, to inform the People of the Book and
remind others from amongst them of their covenant that was made with God
Almighty, ALLAH, to accept and support the prophets prophesized in the
Scripture, and in particular, the Prophet Muhammad (S). Thirdly, it is to
correct the People of the Book concerning foreign beliefs that crept into their
Scripture and message through physical editing, verbal twisting of the Scripture,
and complete rejection of some parts of it. This occurred in some of their beliefs, as
well as their denial of the Prophet (S), though they find him clearly described
in their books.

We see the
proof of this last point as one of the main reasons why we find a Jewish
community residing in Madinah. The Jews never had any religious connection to
Madinah, so why were they there? They
were present because they were awaiting a prophet to come out of the Arabian Peninsula, as described in their books. But many of them denied what they found in
their own scripture, by one way or another.

This is the
essence of why ALLAH revealed verses about the People of the Book in the
Qur’an. These verses, as often times grossly misunderstood by Christian
apologists and ignorant laymen, are not designed for Muslims to try and prove
that the Prophet Muhammad (S) is found in the Bible in order to authenticate
his prophet hood. Not at all! ALLAH has already authenticated that. These
verses are primarily to expose the People of the Book for their denial of the
Prophet Muhammad (S), as it is clear that he is in their books. These verses
are to expose them for their denial and the breach of the covenant that was
made regarding him.

Understanding
these reasons for the verses being revealed about the People of the Book in the
Qur’an should clear up much of the confusion amongst the Christians, who have irresponsibly
attempted to interpret many of these verses in their favor, as to imply that
the Qur’an unequivocally confirms and authenticates the inspiration, preservation
and authority of their present day scripture. For certainly, the Qur’an DOES
NOT! Rather, quite the opposite, as we will now see.

In the
following verses of the Qur’an (ayahs), we will see how beautifully the Qur’an
highlights the relationship between the previous scriptures.If one can understand these verses, then they
will understand all other verses related to the People of The Book. ALLAH begins with the Torah and concludes with
the Qur’an, showing how clear ALLAH makes His signs, for those who reflect and
understand.

Qur’an Ch.
5, verses 44, 46-48:

“Indeed, We sent down the Torah, in which was guidance
and light. The prophets who submitted [to Allah] judged by it for the Jews, as
did the rabbis and scholars by that with which they were entrusted of the
Scripture of Allah, and they were witnesses thereto. So do not fear the people
but fear Me, and do not exchange My verses for a small price. And whoever does
not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the
disbelievers…” (5:44).

“And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus, the
son of Mary, confirming that which came before him in the Torah; and We gave
him the Gospel, in which was guidance and light and confirming that which
preceded it of the Torah as guidance and instruction for the righteous” (5:46).

“And let the People of the Gospel judge by what Allah
has revealed therein. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed -
then it is those who are the defiantly disobedient” (5:47).

“And We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], the Book
in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture and as a criterion
over it. So judge between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow
their inclinations away from what has come to you of the truth. To each of you
We prescribed a law and a method. Had Allah willed, He would have made you one
nation [united in religion], but [He intended] to test you in what He has given
you; so race to [all that is] good. To Allah is your return altogether, and He
will [then] inform you concerning that over which you used to differ” (5:48).

In a large section dealing with the People of the
Book, ALLAH begins with the Jewish community and part of their scripture called
the Torah. He stated that it contained
light and guidance and was used by their prophets, Rabbis and scholars to judge
by. Note that ALLAH states here that they
were ENTRUSTED with their scripture and witnesses thereto. This is a
fundamental belief here because ALLAH makes it clear that He revealed the
Scripture to them, and entrusted them with it and to be witnesses thereto and
over it. So, it was for the Jewish community
to bear their scripture and assure its application and preservation. This is
expressed clearly in another part of the Qur’an, where ALLAH says:

“The example of those who were entrusted with the
Torah and then did not take it on is like that of a donkey who carries volumes
[of books]. Wretched is the example of the people who deny the signs of Allah. And Allah does not guide the wrongdoing
people” (62:5).

Ibn Kathir, in his footnote on this ayah, says that
they were even worse than donkeys since they corrupted, changed and distorted
the Torah, and donkeys don’t have that ability. But, the point here is that
they were ENTRUSTED WITH IT.

Next, ALLAH mentions that He sent Jesus, the son of
Mary, following in their footsteps and confirmed that which came before him in
the Torah, and that ALLAH gave Jesus the Injil (Gospel). Again, affirming that it contained guidance
and light and that it confirmed what came before it, i.e. the Torah. ALLAH continues and states, “…And let the
People of the Injil (Gospel) judge by what ALLAH has revealed therein…” (5:47).
What is the meaning of this? Remember
that ALLAH is highlighting the succession of scripture and prophets and how one
relates to the other and confirms the other. So, just as ALLAH revealed the Torah, it was
for the people of the Torah to judge by it as it relates to the people of the
Injil (the coming of Jesus) and likewise, ALLAH commands the people of the
Injil to judge by what ALLAH revealed in their book as it relates to the advent
of the Prophet Muhammad (S). This is
clearly the case, as stated in the following ayah where Allah says:

“Say, ‘O People of the Scripture, you are [standing]
on nothing until you uphold [the law of] the Torah, the Gospel, AND what has
been revealed to you from your Lord.’ And that which has been revealed to you from
your Lord will surely increase many of them in transgression and disbelief. So
do not grieve over the disbelieving people” (5:68).

This is the explanation of the aforementioned verse
about the people of the Injil judging by what ALLAH revealed therein. This
judging has everything to do with the acceptance of the Prophet Muhammad (S), just
as the judging of the Jews, in the general sense, had everything to do with the
acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah. If
the Christians are to blame the Jews for not believing in the Messiah, although
mentioned in their books, then they are as well to be blamed for not believing
in the Prophet Muhammad, who was mentioned in their books. This is made clear and seals the case shut in
the following two verses, where ALLAH says:

“And [mention, O Muhammad], when Allah took a covenant
from those who were given the Scripture, [saying], ‘You must make it clear to
the people and not conceal it.’ But they threw it away behind their backs and
exchanged it for a small price. And wretched is that which they purchased”
(3:187).

“O People of the Scripture, there has come to you Our
Messenger making clear to you much of what you used to conceal of the Scripture
and overlooking much. There has come to you from Allah a light and a clear Book”
(5:15).

Clearly again, ALLAH is reminding the People of the
Book of their covenant, which was to accept and support the Prophet Muhammad as
described in their books, while blaming them for trying to hide that fact and
rejecting him.

Consider the following quote from the scholar,
Professor Abdul Ahad Dawud in the foreword of his great work titled, Muhammad
in the Bible, where we can find an in depth look at the Prophet Muhammad
(S) in the previous scriptures. He states:

“We read the following words in the Book of Deuteronomy
chapter xviii, verse 18: ‘I will raise them up a prophet from among their
brethren, like unto thee; and I will put my words in his mouth.’ If these words
do not apply to Prophet Muhammad, they still remain unfulfilled. Prophet Jesus
himself never claimed to be the Prophet alluded to. Even his disciples were of
the same opinion: they looked to the second coming of Jesus for the fulfillment
of the prophecy. So far, it is undisputed that the first coming of Jesus was
not the advent of the "prophet like unto thee," and his second advent
can hardly fulfill the words. Jesus, as is believed by his Church, will appear
as a Judge and not as a law-giver; but the promised one has to come with a "fiery law" in "his right
hand." In ascertaining the personality of the promised prophet the other
prophecy of Moses is, however, very helpful where it speaks of the shining
forth of God from Paran, the mountain
of Mecca. The words in
the Book of Deuteronomy, chapter xxxii, verse 2, run as follows: ‘The
Lord came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from
mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints; from his right hand went
a fiery law for them.’

In these words the Lord has been compared with the sun. He comes
from Sinai, he rises from Seir, but he shines in his full glory from Paran,
where he had to appear with ten thousands of saints with a fiery law in his
right hand. None of the Israelites, including Jesus, had anything to do with
Paran. Hagar, with her son Ishmael, wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba, who afterwards
dwelt in the wilderness of Paran (Gen. xxi. 21).

He married an Egyptian woman, and through his first-born, Kedar,
gave descent to the Arabs who from that time till now are the dwellers of the
wilderness of Paran. And if Prophet Muhammad admittedly on all hands traces his descent to Ishmael
through Kedar and he appeared as a prophet in the wilderness of Paran and re-entered
Mecca with ten thousand saints and gave a fiery law to his people, is not the
prophecy above-mentioned fulfilled to its very letter?

The words of the prophecy in Habakkuk are especially noteworthy.
His (the Holy One from Paran) glory covered the heavens and the earth was full
of his praise. The word "praise" is very significant, as the very
name Muhammad literally means "the praised one." Besides the Arabs,
the inhabitants of the wilderness of Paran had also been promised a Revelation:
"Let the wilderness and the cities thereof lift up their voice, the
villages that Kedar doth inhabit: let the inhabitants of the rock sing, let
them shout from the top of the mountains. Let them give glory unto the Lord,
and declare His praise in the islands. The Lord shall go forth as a mighty man,
he shall stir up jealousy like a man of war, he shall cry, yea, roar; he shall
prevail against his enemies" (Isaiah). In connection with it there are two
other prophecies worthy of note where references have been made to Kedar. The
one runs thus in chapter lx of Isaiah: "Arise, shine for thy light is
come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee ... The multitude of camels
shall cover thee, the dromedaries of Midian and Ephah; all they from Sheba shall
come. All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered together unto thee, the rams of Nebaioth shall minister unto thee: they shall come up with
acceptance on mine altar, and I will glorify the house of my glory" (1-7).
The other prophecy is again in Isaiah "The burden upon Arabia.
In the forest in Arabia shall ye lodge, O ye
travelling companies of Dedanim. The inhabitants of the land of Tema
brought water to him that was thirsty, they prevented with their bread him that
fled. For they fled from the swords and from the bent bow, and from the
grievousness of war. For thus hath the Lord said unto me, Within a year,
according to the years of an hireling, and all the glory of Kedar shall fail:
And the residue of the number of archers, the mighty of the children of Kedar,
shall be diminished" Read these prophecies in Isaiah in the light of one
in Deutero- nomy which speaks of the shining forth of God from Paran. If
Ishmael inhabited the wilderness of Paran, where he gave birth to Kedar, who is
the ancestor of the Arabs; and if the sons of Kedar had to receive revelation
from God; if the flocks of Kedar had to come up with acceptance to a Divine
altar to glorify "the house of my glory" where the darkness had to
cover the earth for some centuries, and then that very land had to receive
light from God; and if all the glory of Kedar had to fail and the number of
archers, the mighty men of the children of Kedar, had to diminish within a year
after the one fled from the swords and from the bent bows - the Holy One from
Paran (Habakkuk iii 3 ) is no one else than Prophet Muhammad. Prophet Muhammad
is the holy offspring of Ishmael through Kedar, who settled in the wilderness
of Paran. Muhammad is the only Prophet through whom the Arabs received
revelation at the time when the darkness had covered the earth. Through him God
shone from Paran, and Mecca
is the only place where the House of God is glorified and the flocks of Kedar
come with acceptance on its altar.

Prophet Muhammad was persecuted by his people and had to leave Mecca. He was thirsty and
fled from the drawn sword and the bent bow, and within a year after his flight
the descendants of Kedar meet him at Badr, the place of the first battle
between the Meccans and the Prophet, the children of Kedar and their number of
archers diminish and all the glory of Kedar fails.

If the Holy Prophet is not to be accepted as the fulfillment of
all these prophecies they will still remain unfulfilled. "The house of my
glory" referred to in Isaiah lX is the house of God in Mecca
and not the Church
of Christ as thought by
Christian commentators. The flocks of Kedar, as mentioned in verse 7, have
never come to the Church of Christ; and it is a fact that the villages of Kedar
and their inhabitants are the only people in the whole world who have remained impenetrable
to any influence of the Church
of Christ. Again, the
mention of 10,000 saints in Deuteronomy xxx 3 is very significant. He (God)
shined forth from Paran, and he came with 10,000 of saints. Read the whole
history of the wilderness of Paran and you will find no other event but when Mecca was conquered by
the Prophet. He comes with 10,000 followers from Medina and re-enters "the house of my glory."
He gives the fiery law to the world, which reduced to ashes all other laws.

The Comforter – the Spirit of Truth - spoken of by Prophet Jesus
was no other than Prophet Muhammad himself. It cannot be taken as the Holy
Ghost, as the Church theology says. "It is expedient for you that I go
away," says Jesus, "for if I go not away the Comforter will not come
unto you, but if I depart I will send him unto you." The words clearly
show that the Comforter had to come after the departure of Jesus, and was not with
him when he uttered these words.

Are we to presume that Jesus was devoid of the Holy Ghost if his
coming was conditional on the going of Jesus: besides, the way in which Jesus
describes him makes him a human being, not a ghost. "He shall not speak of
himself, but whatsoever he shall hear that he shall speak." Should we
presume that the Holy Ghost and God are two distinct entities and that the Holy
Ghost speaks of himself and also what he hears from God? The words of Jesus
clearly refer to some messenger from God. He calls him the Spirit of Truth, and
so the Qur'an speaks of Prophet Muhammad,

"No, indeed, he has brought the truth, and confirmed the
Messengers." Ch.37:37”

Now, this article is not about trying to prove the
Prophet Muhammad (S) in the Bible, but rather, to show those who don’t
understand the reason behind the command in the Qur’an for the People of the
Book to JUDGE by their respective scripture. If this understanding is lost, they will
continue to misinterpret the verses of the Qur’an.When ALLAH states for them to judge by their
scripture, it is in fact telling them to honor their covenant and accept and
believe in the Prophet Muhammad (S).

Well, one may ask, how about the fact that the Qur’an
says that it confirms the previous scriptures? Doesn’t that mean that the Bible is true? How
or why would ALLAH confirm a scripture if the scripture is not true? This is a
very good point to consider. And in
fact, the Qur’an does attest to the veracity of the previous scriptures, but it
does so in its principle and in their original form, as Allah states in the
following verse, “O you who have believed,
believe in Allah and His Messenger and the Book that He sent down upon His
Messenger and the Scripture which He sent down before. And whoever disbelieves
in Allah, His angels, His books, His messengers, and the Last Day has certainly
gone far astray” (4:136).

However, the Bible that is possessed today, although
it does contain some of the original message to a certain degree, has
unfortunately, undergone serious and gross manipulation and distortion. There
have been additions and deletions, so much so that the Bible now consists of
the words of God, along with the words of prophets, wise men, historians, and
even unscrupulous men, claiming to represent God.As such, it is nearly impossible to decipher
on one’s own what is actually from God and what is from other than God. For this reason, in the first series of verses
quoted above, we see that ALLAH commands us to believe also in the Qur’an, as
it is a preserver and guardian over the previous scriptures. It is by the Qur’an that we know what is from
God and what is not in the scriptures that we have at our disposal now. So yes, the Qur’an confirms the previous scriptures,
even in their distorted form, because that cannot be taken away from the
reality of that book, but it also clearly states that the Qur’an is the
revelation from God that will make clear what is from God and what is not in
the former scriptures. And this is another meaning of the verse in which ALLAH
tells the People of the Book that they have nothing unless they, not only
believe in their book, but also believe in what was sent in the final
revelation to the Prophet Muhammad (S). If not, then belief in their book alone is not
enough. It is, in fact, the Qur’an that comes to not only confirm the previous
Scriptures, but also to safeguard the true teaching therein and to serve as a detailed explanation
of it, as ALLAH states in another verse in the Holy Qur’an:

“And it was not [possible] for this Qur'an to be
produced by other than Allah, but [it is] a confirmation of what was before it
and a detailed explanation of the [former] Scripture, about which there is no
doubt, from the Lord of the worlds” (10:37).

So, if we find, for example, the stories in the Bible
about previous prophets committing major crimes and breaches of even the commandments,
while we find those same prophets being honored and shown to be examples to
follow in the Qur’an, then we disregard the Biblical stories about those prophets
and dismiss them and its content as not being from ALLAH, God Almighty. Similarly,
if we read passages that seemingly allude to the worship of any other than God
Almighty, while in the Qur’an we see a strict monotheism presented, we
disregard those verses in the Bible and dismiss them and their content as not
being from ALLAH, God Almighty. This is what is meant here, and there is no
doubt in it (i.e. the Qur’an).

Let us now turn our attention quickly to the fact
concerning the historical preservation, or the lack thereof, of the previous
scriptures.

In the book of
Jeremiah, Ch. 8:8-9, it reads, “How can you say, we are wise, for we have the
law of the Lord, when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it
falsely? The wise will be put to shame; they will be dismayed and trapped,
since they have rejected the word of the Lord, what kind of wisdom do they
have?”

In Galatians, Ch. 1:6-7, Paul clearly shows his
disdain for other gospels when he says, “I am astonished that you are so
quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning
to a different gospel – which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into
confusion and are trying to pervert the Gospel of Christ.”

The above are very interesting quotes from the Bible
itself. One need not be a doctor of law
to understand that some manipulation, distortion and conflicting sources are
pressing upon the Biblical text.Again,
this article is not designed to explore this point extensively, but we hope
that the above mentioned citations are helpful in pointing to the lack of
historical preservation as it relates to previous scriptures.

Now, let us turn to what the Qur’an says about this
matter. In the following verses, Allah
says:

“But those who wronged, changed [those words] to a
statement other than that which had been said to them, so We sent down upon
those who wronged, a punishment from the sky because they were defiantly
disobeying” (2:59).

“So
woe to those who write the scripture with their own hands, then say, "This
is from Allah,” in order to exchange it for a small price. Woe to them for what
their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn” (2:79).

“And indeed, there is among them a party who alter the
Scripture with their tongues so you may think it is from the Scripture, but it
is not from the Scripture. And they say, "This is from Allah," but it
is not from Allah. And they speak untruth about Allah while they know” (3:78).

“So for their breaking of the covenant, We cursed them
and made their hearts hard. They distort
words from their [proper] usages and have forgotten a portion of that of which
they were reminded. And you will still
observe deceit among them, except a few of them. But pardon them and overlook
[their misdeeds]. Indeed, Allah loves the doers of good.And from those who say, ‘We are Christians’
We took their covenant; but they forgot a portion of that of which they were
reminded. So We caused among them animosity and hatred until the Day of
Resurrection. And Allah is going to
inform them about what they used to do.O
People of the Scripture, there has come to you Our Messenger making clear to
you much of what you used to conceal of the Scripture and overlooking much.
There has come to you from Allah a light and a clear Book” (5:13-15).

The above verses are emphatically clear to the fact that
the People of the Book, those of the former scriptures, have misappropriated
and distorted their book, in different ways and times. And it is for this fact and others that ALLAH
followed up their scripture with the final scripture, the Qur’an. This, He Glorified and Exalted be He, made
clear that the Qur’an is to be a correcting agent over the previous scriptures.
Moreover, ALLAH guaranteed the safe keeping
and preservation of this final revelation, as He stated in the following verse:

“Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed,
We will be its guardian” (Qur’an, 15:9).

Wait, just a minute! What about those verses in the
Qur’an where ALLAH states emphatically that none can change His Words? How
could ALLAH state this and at the same time, say that His previous revelations
were changed?Would that not be a
contradiction?

This is a great question, essential to understanding
this subject and as such, clarification here is paramount. So, let us look at some of the verses in which
ALLAH mentions that none can change His words and see how that relates to the
previous scriptures and their being tampered with and changed.

In the Qur’an, Allah says:

"And
certainly were messengers denied before you, but they were patient over [the
effects of] denial, and they were harmed until Our victory came to them. And none
can alter the words of Allah. And there
has certainly come to you some information about the [previous] messengers”
(6:34).

“And the word
of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice. None can alter His
words, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing” (6:115).

“For them are
good tidings in the worldly life and in the Hereafter. No change is there in
the words of Allah. That is what is the great attainment” (10:64).

“And recite, [O
Muhammad], what has been revealed to you of the Book of your Lord. There is no
changer of His words, and never will you find in other than Him a refuge” (18:27).

Now,
there are two points to note here. Firstly,
in all of the above mentioned verses, the context shows that there is a promise
that ALLAH’S Words cannot be changed. But,
how do we reconcile this fact with the reality that the previous scriptures
have been changed and distorted? As we
will see, the relationship can be found in the very essence of God’s promise!

It
is His very command or promise or threat that ALLAH is stating cannot be
changed. In other words, the DECREE of
ALLAH cannot be changed! Once ALLAH says that a thing will be like this, in the
form of a promise, threat, or the like, that is what it is and none other than
ALLAH can change that fact. If ALLAH
stated that He will reward a people, give victory, forgive, or guide and so on,
then none can alter what ALLAH has decreed therein. Likewise, if ALLAH stated that He will punish,
deprive, send astray, or the like, then none can change what He decreed in the
matter. In all of the verses above, we find this to be the case. Moreover, the word that is under discussion is
a very particular word, as is found in the following hadith, or saying of the
Prophet Muhammad (S), which further strengthens this point:

“Then there is sent to him
the angel who blows his soul into him and who is commanded with four matters
(decrees/words).

This word that we are
focusing on here is the word “kalimaat” (كَلِمَاتٍ) and it literally means words in a plural sense. But
this word, as seen in all the examples above refers to a decreed word, not revelation,
which takes us to our next point.

In all the cases in the Qur’an where ALLAH mentions
His Revelation, meaning scripture, this word kalimaat is NEVER used! That
is because this word is never associated with revelation or scripture. ALLAH uses words like kitab, wahi, tanzeel, thikr
or the proper names of each respective revelation – i.e. Suhuf, Torah, Zabur, Injeel, Qur’an, or Ath Thikr – in
reference to revelation.On the other
hand, the word kalimaat has never
been used to describe any of the Revelations sent by ALLAH. So, the point here is that, when ALLAH states
that His Words in the plural form (kalimaat) cannot be changed, He is not
referring to His Revelation, but rather, He is referring to His Decreed Word! This is clear to anyone who is familiar with
the Qur’an. But, as is seen, when one
has no idea of the Qur’an, then gross errors will be made in trying to
interpret it!

In closing on this point, it behooves us to examine
the understanding of those earliest Muslims from the time of the Prophet
Muhammad (S) as it relates to their view of the previous scriptures. Since they were receiving the understanding
directly from the Messenger of ALLAH, their views would be very revealing on
this matter.

In a very decisive hadith found in Sahih Bukhari,
it states the following:

“Narrated Ubaidullah: Ibn
'Abbas said, ‘Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while
your Book (Quran) which has been revealed to Allah's Apostle is newer and the
latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the
people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and
distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands
and said, 'It is from Allah,' to sell it for a little gain. Does not the
knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything?’ No, by Allah, we have never seen any man
from them asking you regarding what has been revealed to you!"
(Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Holding Fast to the Qur'an and Sunnah, Volume 9,
Book 92, Number 461). Thus, the matter is clear for those who reflect.

Now, let us look at one more
verse from the Qur’an that is often misinterpreted.Often
times, the following verse is used to promote the idea of the Qur’an granting some
kind of stamp of approval regarding the present day Bible’s preservation and
authority and this couldn’t be further from the truth. It is unfortunate how disingenuous people will
be to try to promote their estranged beliefs. In the verse under question, Allah states:

“So if you are in doubt, [O
Muhammad], about that which We have revealed to you, then ask those who have
been reading the Scripture before you. The truth has certainly come to you from
your Lord, so never be among the doubters” (10:94).

So, here we have a clear proof
that when one’s heart is closed, the truth will have no impact on it.Our zealot Christian brothers insist that
this verse is proof that the Qur’an authenticates the Bible. As they exclaim, “How can your ALLAH command
the Prophet Muhammad (S) to ask the People of the Book if their scripture is
corrupt? Indeed, this is a very
deceptive question, and if one just reads the context, it becomes quite clear
what is being stated here.

Let us examine the very
beginning of the verse in question. The very first letter in the verse 10:94,
is the letter “FA”. Now, “FA” is a letter of conjunction, meaning, that it follows
a thought and can NEVER begin a thought! It is the equivalent of the word “therefore”
or “so” in the English language. Now, if
you ever see the word “therefore” in a sentence, what is the first thing that
comes to mind? One would first want to
know what was said before. Why? Because that’s how we will understand why “therefore”
was being used. Now, what happens when
one neglects to see what came before the “therefore,” even though the word is
screaming at you to read what preceded it? Of course, one will most certainly
misunderstand the statement. And this is
exactly what happens and is the case with the zealots! They are so anxious to
find something against the Qur’an that they will violate any and all principles
of grammar to manipulate texts in order to suit their agenda.

Now that we have cleared
that up, let us see what was being said before so we can fully understand why
ALLAH is exhorting the Prophet Muhammad (S) to even ask the People of the Book.
It goes up about four verses to verse
ninety, so let us start from there - chapter 10, verses 90-93.

“And We took the Children of
Israel across the sea, and Pharaoh and his soldiers pursued them in tyranny and
enmity until, when drowning overtook him, he said, ‘I believe that there is no
deity except that in whom the Children of Israel believe, and I am of the
Muslims.’ Now? And you had disobeyed
[Him] before and were of the corrupters? So today We will save you in body, that you
may be to those who succeed you, a sign. And indeed, many among the people, of Our
signs, are heedless. And We had certainly
settled the Children of Israel in an agreeable settlement and provided them
with good things. And they did not
differ until [after] knowledge had come to them. Indeed, your Lord will judge
between them on the Day of Resurrection concerning that over which they used to
differ” (Qur’an, 10:90-93).

Given the proper context,
one clearly sees that ALLAH is narrating an event that took place involving the
Children of Israel, who are termed the People of the Book in the Qur’an, along
with the Christians, in order to bring about a historical lesson. ALLAH is making this event known to the
Prophet Muhammad (S) and those around him, and in that context, using an expression
of emphasis, ALLAH exhorts the Prophet (S), and any after him by extension, to
ask those who are familiar with this event from their scriptures if doubts
occur.

If I may indulge the point
with an example, it is akin to me telling my wife about a childhood story of
mine. Then, when I conclude the story, I say (as we hear many people say when
trying to emphasize the point), “Ask so & so if you don’t believe me!” This is most common. And such an expression does not, in any way,
imply that so & so is free from lies or anything of the like. Nor does it
make so & so a sole authority on my life. Rather, it is an expression to reiterate the
narration and appeal to someone that in fact is acquainted with the event.If you don’t know about something, then ask
those who are familiar with it.

Now, let’s return to the
verse at hand.Right afterwards, ALLAH
exhorts the Prophet Muhammad (S) to ask those who are familiar with the narrations
of the earlier events. He concludes by saying that certainly the Truth has come
to you from your Lord, so never doubt!

Does this sound like God is
trying to convey, in some way, that the previous scriptures are preserved and
authoritative? Rather, the scriptures are not even a subject in this context. It was mentioned as an appeal to a historical
narration, as one might appeal to a newspaper, for example. Would that mean that if I appeal to a
newspaper to confirm an event of the past, that I am somehow implying that
everything in that newspaper is authentic and authoritative? How absurd a conclusion! Yet, we have the same line of reasoning
amongst Christian apologist zealots. But
as we now see, it is nothing more than a ploy on their behalf.

In closing, I would like to
remind us of the verse from the Qur’an in which ALLAH confirms the previous scriptures
but makes it absolutely clear to the People of the Book that although you have
in your possession a scripture from God Almighty, you still have nothing if you
don’t accept and uphold the Qur’an.

“Say, ‘O People of the Scripture, you are [standing]
on nothing until you uphold [the law of] the Torah, the Gospel, and what has
been revealed to you from your Lord.’ And that which has been revealed to you from
your Lord will surely increase many of them in transgression and disbelief. So
do not grieve over the disbelieving people” (5:68).